Extra-marital relationships are potentially relevant, for example, if a valid prenuptial agreement states that divorce settlement consequences will result if such a relationship occurs. However, the distribution of assets between spouses is not usually affected by extra-marital relationship activity, due to the no-fault system available in New York and every other state.

Exceptions can sometimes be made if assets have been directly affected by the extra-marital relationship. For example, if a marital asset, such as the home, is borrowed against by one partner in order to support his or her companion, this could affect how the asset and relevant debt are treated in the divorce settlement.

In addition, if joint funds or marital property were given to a spouse’s companion, these assets could also be affected.

In some states, fault-based divorce is still an option available to spouses. In these situations too, an affair may affect a divorce settlement. In particular, such activity may impact alimony payment obligations.

All money matters aside, extra-marital affairs may affect child custody disputes if, during the course of the affair, the involved parent exposed the children to inappropriate situations or people.

Finally, the emotional response of both spouses to the affair, which may include guilt, anger, resentment, etc., could certainly affect their approaches to the divorce case as a whole. This emotional response is harder to qualify, but is ultimately the most significant consequence for the purpose of proceedings.

If you are divorcing in Illinois, imagine you agree to pay your former spouse a fixed amount of maintenance so long as he or she cannot come back in the future and try to get more maintenance.  You would want to be sure that your Marital Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) protected you from the possibility of your former spouse dragging you back to court in the future when you may be earning a higher income or he or she has suffered a financial setback.  In order to properly protect yourself, you need to understand the different types of maintenance we have in Illinois.

There are several different kinds of maintenance in Illinois.  The most typical maintenance is periodic maintenance which is defined by its indefiniteness.  Periodic maintenance may be modified or terminated if the situation of the parties changes in the future.  Another type of maintenance is “maintenance in gross”.  Maintenance in gross is a lump sum payment that is paid once or over a definite number of installments.  Maintenance in gross is not modifiable if the circumstances of one or both of the parties changes.  A recent Illinois appeals case addressed the issue of whether the maintenance provision in a MSA intended periodic maintenance or maintenance in gross.  The MSA did not explicitly state that the maintenance was in gross and the provision was ambiguous.  Years after the divorce, the recipient sought to increase the maintenance and the payor claimed the maintenance was in gross and non-modifiable.  Ultimately, the appellate court held that the maintenance was not in gross because the MSA did not comply with the requirements necessary for such.

If maintenance in gross is the agreement reached in a dissolution case, the MSA needs to clearly state that the maintenance is in gross and non-modifiable and comply with the legal requirements.

I listened to their stories, sorted out their issues, ruled on their motions, heard their evidence at trial, and entered orders awarding custody, dividing property, setting child support, and establishing maintenance. Over the years I believe I developed the ability to see the middle ground in a dispute and to grasp the heart of the issues presented to me. My objective was to help the parties resolve disputes without extensive — and expensive — litigation.

Now that I have left the bench and entered private practice, the pain my clients experience when restructuring a family through litigation is even more apparent. It is therefore my goal to use my experience as a judge to help people ease their pain and reduce their cost by informing them on options to resolve their disputes through an alternative to litigation, including the process of mediation.

What is mediation?
Mediation is basically a process of negotiation with the assistance of a professional but neutral advisor. The purpose is to help the parties determine their priorities, communicate effectively, and identify reasonable and mutually acceptable options to resolve their dispute.

When is mediation appropriate?
Mediation works well for people who are emotionally capable of communicating with each other and who realize the advantages of avoiding costly litigation. The parties must first be able to identify and agree upon what issues are in dispute. They must be willing to compromise to reach a resolution. And they must be prepared to accept that a mediated settlement will allow them to determine the outcome rather than having a decision imposed on them through stressful litigation and the court.

When is mediation not recommended?
Mediation is not appropriate in all cases. When personality disorders, substance abuse, or domestic violence are present in a relationship, mediation is often impossible. It is also not appropriate when the parties are in heated conflict, are unable to act in good faith, or fail to fully disclose the relevant issues and their true assets.

Are there other options?
In cases where mediation is unlikely to succeed, litigation in a courtroom remains as a common alternative. However, many parties may benefit from a third option, what is known as Collaborative Law. In the collaborative process, each party retains an attorney who agrees to manage the case without court involvement. The attorneys assemble teams that may include financial experts and mental health professionals, and they work together to help divorcing couples reach a settlement out of court. If the collaborative process fails, and mediation is not seen as an option, the parties are free to pursue a litigated resolution.

Divorce is difficult. However, you can minimize the emotional and financial cost by selecting the process that is best for your family. If you and your spouse can be civil with each other, and if your goal is a fair settlement, mediation is a highly valuable process that can help both parties move forward in their new circumstances with a fresh and positive attitude.

Mediation is not for everyone. It requires two people who still respect one another, who can communicate without inserting emotional baggage into the conversation, and who share the common goal of maintaining a productive relationship for the benefit of their own future and their children’s. One usually hears the horror stories of bad divorces, but there are also many successful divorces. As a former judge, I presided over hundreds of cases.  As a lawyer, I have represented hundreds of clients. Over the years, I came to realize that, in most cases, there is good in people that a qualified mediator can build on.

In mediation, spouses meet with a qualified neutral professional, usually an experienced attorney, to discuss their problems, exchange financial information, and work with the mediator to attain their own settlement without involvement of the courts, retained experts, accountants, or litigious attorneys. It takes special people to mediate their differences in a positive manner so that their settlement suggestions constructively build a successful resolution.  In this way, the parties avoid prolong conflict and extensive costs.

There are many benefits to mediation. Mediation costs less than litigation. The parties pay a mediator to help work out a settlement, and then the parties’ lawyers bring the settlement to court for its approval and for the actual divorce. Mediation is not emotionally wrenching like litigation, and therefore, it is less painful and less complicated. The family is the winner, especially the children. In mediation, the parties are in control of their own destiny. This control is not entrusted or delegated to a litigator or some over-worked judge. If there is an imbalance of power, the mediator ensures that there is a level playing field and that the power between the couple is equalized if it is apparent that one spouse has a stronger personality or has greater knowledge of the finances. Mediation takes less time than litigation. A complicated divorce could be litigated over the course of years. Mediation usually takes a matter of months.

If spouses are civil and mindful of the each other’s needs, and their goal is a fair settlement coupled with closure, mediation is a valuable alternative. However, if a spouse is unreasonable, over-reaching, unstable, addicted to controlled substances, or in pursuit of a scorched earth policy, mediation may not be the best course. So if mediation does not suit the parties’ goals or if it fails, the court-house always awaits.

As working parents’ roles in the lives of their children evolve with the demands of the modern economy, so too do their parental rights as divorced parents.

Traditionally, a child’s custodial parent would be the primary residential parent and child support recipient and the non-custodial parent would pay child support and be granted “visitation.” Those of us raised in the 1970’s and 80’s remember the “one evening per week and every other weekend” schedule as the de facto visitation for all the divorced fathers we knew. Expanded parenting time, or even joint legal custody (the right to an equal say in the major decisions affecting a child’s life), were reserved for the most amicable of divorced parents.

Oh how times have changed. In today’s negotiations, more non-custodial parents are asking to expand their weekends to include Thursdays and/or Mondays, so that they too can participate in the children’s school routine, whether that be helping with homework, packing lunches, or just staying involved in the day-to-day lives of their children. Overnights on school nights, extended weekends and the like are much more prevalent today than in the past.

Our traditional model of parenting time was predicated on the notion that most families were single income earning families. Mom was staying home with the kids and Dad was out working 9:00 to 5:00 Monday through Friday. That is not the world we live in anymore, and our parenting schedules are reflecting that trend. In today’s economy, two income earner households are the norm and more married parents divide responsibilities for the children. If the parents in dual income families divorce, the allocation of shared responsibilities established during the marriage may lend itself to a shared parenting time schedule post-divorce.

But shared parenting time is not a given for even dual income families. It takes the highest degree of cooperation and trust between the divorced parties to make shared parenting time work. First, the parents must live in the same school district so as to have immediate access to schools, extracurricular activities and the like. Second, both parents need to share in the logistical obligations necessary to maintain such a schedule. If one parent travels for work every week, or works long burdensome hours, he or she may not be consistently available to do his or her share of the school pickups and drop offs. Working spouses must be flexible in their work schedules and make sacrifices in order for a shared parenting time schedule to work effectively.

Third, effective communication and coordination between the divorced parents is a must. With the children splitting their time between two homes, cooperation in getting homework done and coordination of transportation responsibilities is essential. Inevitably, emergencies will arise when a parent is stuck at the office and the other must fill in, even though it may not be his or her scheduled time. The failure to effectively cooperate and coordinate in a shared parenting time schedule will harm the children first and foremost.

Importantly, a parent should not use a shared parenting schedule as a basis to avoid the obligation to pay child support. Custodial and financial rights and obligations are not tied together under the law, and the designation of a custodial (i.e. child support recipient) parent is predicated on a variety of facts that do not necessarily include the allocation of parenting time between the parents. Too many non-custodial parents attempt to leverage parenting time against their obligation to pay child support, and a court will not be receptive to a parent’s argument for shared parenting time if the court believes that parent’s motivation for seeking such shared time is financial.

Extended parenting time allows both parents to remain intimately involved in the daily lives of their children. For those parents who are willing to cooperate and make the necessary concessions to stay involved in the lives of the children, extended parenting time may be possible.

Despite these values, as Jews living in this century, we also share unfortunate social problems with our American society. The prevalence of divorce in our community is one such problem. Divorce, which causes even the altar in the Holy Temple to shed tears (Gittin 90b), is an unfortunate and disruptive event not only for the individuals involved, but also for their friends, families and community. Still, if divorce is the inescapable route that a couple must take, the Torah recognizes this reality and prescribes how to deal with it.

But beyond the event of divorce itself, our community must address a related societal concern — the bitter, hostile and destructive consequences which may result when a husband and wife separate and end their marriage. Whether adjudicating their divorce through civil court or through a beit din (Jewish court), all too often it is done with one spouse pitted against the other, as adversaries. The repercussions of this adversarial attitude cannot be overstated. It is destructive to the couple themselves, their children and to everyone around them.

The Conventional Divorce: An Adversarial Process

A look at the conventional method for obtaining a civil divorce reveals a general attitude of conflict and competition. Why do the friends of a spouse who is contemplating divorce encourage their friend to seek a “shark” for an attorney so that (s)he can soak the other spouse for all (s)he is worth? Why must one spouse be compelled to prove that the other spouse is an “unfit” parent so that (s)he does not “lose” the children? Why do the civil courts refer to one spouse as “plaintiff” and the other as “defendant”? These strategies and this nomenclature accurately demonstrate that in our surrounding society, an adversarial nature (plaintiff versus defendant) is inherent to the process of divorce.

This is not the Jewish approach. From a Torah perspective, an ex-spouse is not a categorical exception to the Biblical commandment of loving thy neighbor. Love and the pursuit of peace is mandated even for those in the midst of conflict. Our Sages teach us that Truth¹, Justice², and even God’s Name³ are compromised for the purpose of establishing Shalom. Indeed, for a Jewish family, just because there is not one bayis, does not mean there should not be Shalom.

But is there an alternative? Can there still be a place for family values, or better yet, Jewish values within the divorce process? Reiterating the query of Rabbi Avrohom Pam shlita⁴ in a recent address calling for a civilized approach to gittin, “Why cannot the task of dissolving the marriage be approached with respect and humanity — with menchlichkeit?”

A Better Alternative: Mediation

In fact, there is an alternative, a process steeped in family and Torah values. That alternative is a process called mediation. And despite a surge of popularity of mediation over the past decade, most divorcing couples and the community at large are simply unaware of mediation, or are uncertain as to how it can be helpful. To correct the most common misnomer, mediation is not marital counseling. Divorce mediation, rather, is for couples who have decided that separation or divorce is inevitable (hopefully, with the guidance of therapists and/or rabbis). Once that decision has been reached, mediation deals with the divorce, helping the couple and their children move on with their lives while avoiding all the unnecessary scars from that decision.

Divorce mediation is a family-centered process guided by a trained, neutral, third party who guides divorcing couples to work through the issues and decisions of a divorce within a collaborative framework. Instead of focusing on adversity and competition, mediation focuses on mutual problem-solving and the best interests of the entire family. Separate conflicts become joint concerns. Mediation thus challenges the methods and assumptions of the adversarial divorce process. It helps to dissolve a marriage by focusing on the future, not by getting stuck casting blame for the past. It seeks to resolve all the pending issues with communication and cooperation, not with adversity or animosity.

In an informal and safe environment, a mediator helps parties communicate and prioritize their needs and goals. One of the most difficult aspects for divorcing couples is the experience of disempowerment and frustration with the divorce process, which they do not understand and over which they have no control. In mediation, the parties retain control of the decisions that relate to their own lives and to the lives of their children. Mediators never make decisions. The most intimate details of one’s future life are not left in the hands of strangers, be it a judge or lawyers battling out strategic positions. Rather, the mediator empowers the couple through the process, facilitating their negotiation towards their own informed and fair agreement, on their own terms, with their own values and priorities.

In mediation, parties work out all the legal issues necessary to finalize their separation or divorce, from parenting (custody and visitation) and support to property division and tax implications, in a faster and less costly process. But the benefits of mediation do not stop there. Informed of, but unrestricted by the narrow parameters imposed by the law, mediating parties can use the flexibility of the process to forge a creative agreement, tailored to the unique circumstances and needs of their own family. Not surprisingly, research has shown that compliance and satisfaction with mediated agreements is higher than those imposed upon divorcing couples by a third party, i.e. a judge.

In contrast to the conventional adversarial divorce, mediation views divorce as an ongoing emotional and family problem, not just a one-time legal problem. Divorce represents the dissolution of only one relationship, that of husband and wife. It does not and should not rupture the entire family, especially concerning relationships between parent and child. In mediation, divorcing parents are trained to develop the necessary skills for successful co-parenting required by their new family status.

As hostile as a couple may feel towards each other, through the help of the mediator, spouses learn to separate the issues and the negative energy they have between them and learn how to focus attention on the truly important matters — on their children and on the decisions that have to be made for the future. The mediator acts as a guide, helping couples to restructure their family — not dissolve it.

Mediation is not an isolated process, but one which seeks guidance from outside attorneys, therapists and rabbis to inform couples of their rights and responsibilities as parents and separating couples. One such right and responsibility which concerns the Jewish community is the get (Jewish bill of divorce). Mediation offers a fresh opportunity to alleviate potential problems with this concern by its orientation towards cooperation and communication. While mediation cannot solve the agunah problem, it can reduce the number of problems by directing couples away from an adversarial and hostile process. A potentially recalcitrant spouse will be less likely to take a hard-lined and unreasonable posture against the other. In mediation, a spouse is more likely to be influenced by the interdependent process, oriented towards collaboration and consideration.

Mediation as the Ideal Jewish Form of Conflict Resolution

From a Jewish perspective, both in a halachic and a philosophic sense, mediation is an ideal process of conflict resolution. Because mediation is not a formal judicial proceeding, it does not violate the Biblical prohibition for a Jew to engage in legal action in a non-Jewish court (archaot)⁵. In fact, by drafting a separation agreement in mediation, a couple seeking a civil divorce will never have to appear in a non-Jewish court, thereby entirely avoiding this Biblical prohibition.

Moreover, mediation is actually the preferred method of conflict resolution used by Jewish courts in a process called psharah (compromised settlement)^{6 , 7}. The Torah mandates us “to do that which is right and good in the sight of the Lord.”⁸ Rashi comments that this refers to psharah, looking beyond the letter of the law. In fact, the halachah establishes that it is a mitzvah to encourage disputing parties to pursue psharah over the adjudication and application of din (strict law)⁹. Capturing the essence of the benefits of mediation, the Talmud states that only psharah, not din, constitutes the ideal justice of mishpat shalom and mishpat tzedek — judgment of peace and judgment of righteousness. No modern formulation has so elegantly expressed the uniqueness of mediation, in its ability to provide an integrated justice balancing the values of fairness, peacefulness and compassion.¹⁰

From as early as Cain and Abel, we learn that conflict is part of human nature. Chazal have instructed us concerning how to best deal with this nature. We are warned that “An argument is like an overflowing stream; the more it flows, the wider it spreads.”¹¹ The Vilna Gaon explains that attempting to stop an argument by arguing is the same as trying to wash one’s face in one’s filth. The more one washes, the more he sullies himself.¹² During the divorce process, as in any conflict, adversity only breeds adversity. Barring extreme circumstances and individuals, parties should seek an alternative approach, one which foresees an end to the current turmoil. Mediation presents such an opportunity.

Shalom, as mentioned above, should be the prime objective in resolving disputes. The Torah is more concerned with restoring social harmony than with arbitrating legal issues. We are advised by Hillel to be of the students of Aaron, not only to love peace, but to pursue peace.¹³ Even if peace is not easy, even in the midst of disagreement, even if we may not love or like a person as we used to, peace should still be the goal to which to aspire and pursue.

Goals for Our Community

For divorcing couples, our community should encourage an alternative course to the one handed to us by the adversarial system. In the darkness of conflict and family transition, our guiding light should come from the tradition of family values and Jewish ethics.¹⁴ We must realize that Shalom, Mishpat and Tzedek, as goals in mediation and Jewish justice, demonstrate strength, not weakness. This strength produces stronger, wiser and more durable and meaningful resolutions of conflict. Our community should attempt to glorify these goals, not betray them. With the proper guidance of Chazal and with the help of family, friends and trained professionals, there is a way out of the snowballing turmoil of conflict with all of its potentially devastating consequences. Through the process of mediation, divorcing couples can regain respect, dignity and civility in their families, their homes and in their hearts.

Myth: Mediation allows one spouse to dominate another.

Fact: A good mediator pays close attention to the power balance between the spouses and uses specific techniques to address any imbalance. If one spouse persists in dominating behavior, the mediator will call a stop to the mediation rather than allowing it to continue. One caveat: Even the best mediator can be unaware of a power imbalance if it only goes on outside of the mediation sessions and the spouses don’t let the mediator know about it.

Myth: Women are at a disadvantage in mediation.

Fact: Women are no more at a disadvantage in mediation than in divorce court. In fact, women can often obtain a better result in mediation than they can in court, because the mediation process allows separating spouses to negotiate an agreement that considers nonlegal factors. Also, except for court-ordered (mandatory) mediation, a woman is free to stop the mediation or refuse to sign an agreement that seems unfair to her.

Myth: Mediation is more of a hassle than hiring a lawyer to handle the divorce.

Fact: Whether divorcing spouses mediate or hire a lawyer to handle the divorce, they have to do a certain amount of gathering information and making decisions. Mediation offers a streamlined approach to the information-gathering and decision-making processes. In contrast, using the courts is cumbersome and expensive.

Myth: Mediation is for wimps.

Fact: In mediation, the spouses stand up for themselves and what they want. They don’t have lawyers speaking for them and telling them what to do. As a result, people who mediate often come out of their divorce with enhanced communication skills and self-confidence, as well as agreements they can really live with.

Myth: Mediation makes the divorce take longer.

Fact: Mediation almost always takes less time than litigating a divorce. Unless the spouses have worked everything out ahead of time, hiring lawyers to handle the divorce will almost always take as long or longer than mediating, even if the lawyers are able to settle out of court.

Myth: There’s no place for lawyers in mediation.

Fact: Lawyers who understand and support mediation can help mediating spouses in several ways: by informing them of their legal rights and options, by coaching them through the negotiations, by coming up with creative settlement ideas, and by preparing the necessary divorce paperwork once an agreement is signed. Most consulting lawyers charge a reasonable hourly fee and don’t require a large retainer (advance deposit). A spouse pays for only as much consulting time as is needed. (To learn more about getting a lawyer’s help in mediation, read Nolo’s articleLawyers and Divorce Mediation.)

Myth: All divorce lawyers understand and support mediation.

Fact: Divorce mediation is still a relatively new way of approaching divorce. Many adversarial lawyers have little or no experience with the nonadversarial approach used in mediation. Some even disapprove of mediation, arguing that divorcing spouses should not negotiate on their own but only through lawyers. These attitudes are slowly changing, as divorce lawyers become more aware of mediation and its benefits for their clients. Meanwhile, spouses wishing to mediate their divorce need to find consulting lawyers who are “mediation-friendly.”

Myth: In mediation, the mediator decides what’s fair.

Fact: Unlike a judge or an arbitrator, a mediator has no power to make decisions for the divorcing spouses. The mediator’s job is to help the spouses negotiate an agreement that each of them considers fair enough to accept.

Myth: Mediation is always the best option for every divorcing couple.

Fact: Mediation works for most divorcing couples. As long as both spouses are able to speak up for what’s important to them and can behave themselves appropriately in mediation, the process can work for them. On the other hand, mediation may not offer enough protection and structure for some couples. For example, a couple with domestic violence or substance abuse issues may need to have lawyers speak for them instead of trying to negotiate directly. In addition, some spouses may prefer to assume the risks and cost of adversarial litigation in order to make a point or assert a legal right rather than compromise in a settlement.

Want More Information?

To explore all avenues for obtaining a divorce without resorting to litigation, get Divorce Without Court: A Guide to Mediation & Collaborative Divorce, by Katherine E. Stoner (Nolo).

by: Katherine Stoner

It’s right up there with death of a spouse for the most stressful life events we can experience. Yet just as you cannot escape the paperwork and financial issues after the death of a loved one, you can’t afford to ignore the financial aspects of a divorce, as you are setting the foundation for the next chapter in your life. As difficult as this time is, and regardless of which side of the divorce you are on, you must keep good records and clear thoughts.

First things first

The first task is to gather copies of records, documenting what you own and what you owe. As with all things in a divorce, if you and your spouse are able to collaborate and work together, this will be easier than if you have to hunt for things on your own, especially if you don’t know what to look for.

A good place to start is with the tax return. A tax return tells a lot about a person’s finances, from income to housing costs. Schedule B should show you where you’ve earned interest and dividends, so you can track down those statements, and Schedule D (if any) leads to more investment statements. The return may show an IRA deduction or you may see a “D” on a W2, leading you to a retirement account deferral. You’ll also need that tax return itself, to document earnings and project taxes.

Spending plan

In order to have a clear understanding of your financial position post-divorce, you’ll need to know what it costs to live. Even if you kept good track of your spending pre-divorce, your new life as a single person is likely to be quite different. Especially if you are weighing whether to keep your house, it is vitally important to know the costs.

This is a time where it pays to track the details of your daily spending. Your system can be as low tech as carrying a small notebook to record your purchases and bills. Look over a calendar to jog your memory for expenses that don’t come up every month like birthday gifts, sports fees or seasonal clothing purchases. Some of your expenses will go down, simply because your household is smaller, but you’ll have some increases, too.

You may need to hire someone to do chores that your spouse previously took care of, or perhaps pay for your health insurance premiums. Will you be inclined to take the kids out more often to “make up” for the divorce or perhaps paying for counseling to work through that guilt instead?

Closing the gap

Once you have a grasp on what it will take to run your new household, the challenge will be to fund it. The income pool you shared previously will now essentially be stretched to cover two households. Unless you had a large surplus of income pre-divorce, likely either the standard of living for one or both households will go down, new income will need to be generated, or both.

When determining how much income or support is needed, you’ll need to consider the tax treatment of that income in light of your changed financial situation.

A custodial parent may find that with her lower income, she has more to take home because of a light tax burden, or on the other hand, the higher earning spouse may now have less in hand due to the loss of tax deductions. It is important to have good tax advice so you can make decisions knowing the full impact.

Splitting up the stuff

The biggest decision in dividing assets in divorce usually is — “Who gets the house?” But perhaps the question should be — “Does keeping the house make sense?” Anyone who has ever owned a house knows that a house is an asset that costs you money, and sometimes a lot of it. If you are the spouse considering staying in the house, can you afford not just the mortgage and taxes, but the upkeep of the house? Do you have the means (and credit) to refinance to take your spouse off the mortgage? If you do, then great!

But this is one decision that is fraught with emotion, and it pays (literally) to take a step back and look at it objectively. Keeping your kids in the house for the sake of continuity is important, but will it be worse for them if you struggle to pay the bills, work too much, and are too stressed to enjoy your time with them?

Aside from the house, the next largest asset couples typically need to split is retirement accounts. To avoid unintended tax consequences, it is critical to have legal and tax advice in splitting these assets. For instance, there is a way to withdraw retirement assets without paying an early withdrawal penalty when done correctly with a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. But the rules must be carefully followed or you could end up with that 10 percent penalty, or the wrong spouse could be subject to the tax.

When evaluating assets and how to divide them, be mindful of the character of the assets — amounts in traditional retirement accounts typically have not yet been taxed, and will be worth less to you upon withdrawal than money in a savings account. So watch the price tag and weigh accordingly.

In a contentious divorce, spouses may get caught up in either getting the most support or share of the assets possible from the other, or in paying the very least, without considering how the outcome may affect the family overall. Especially when kids are involved, leaving one spouse or the other broke does not serve the family well. A different solution is approaching the divorce in a collaborative manner, working together to determine the optimal overall division of income and assets, as well as resolving the myriad of family issues that come with divorce, while minimizing conflict and emotional damage.

In the collaborative divorce, the spouses commit to a process of focused negotiating sessions to share information, work out concerns, and come to agreement. Collaborative divorce is different from mediation, as each party is still represented by his or her own independent attorney, but the objective is to work together to achieve the best possible outcome for all involved, rather than fighting it out. The addition of a mental health professional and financial specialist to the team offers neutral, objective advice to the family.

Erin Baehr is a certified financial planner and owner of Baehr Family Financial, a fee-only financial planning firm in Stroudsburg (www.YourMoneyEveryday.com). Baehr can be reached at 570-223-1550 or at Facebook.com/YourMoneyEveryday.

The “Start Over Smart” expo, the first divorce expo in the U.S., promises to put a friendly face on the process. The two-day event, held in New York City this weekend, will draw industry professionals together to offer information and services to those going through a divorce.

Francine Baras and her daughter Nicole Baras Feuer are launching “Start Over Smart” with hopes that it will be a hit and enable them to host the event in other cities. And with half of all marriages in the U.S. ending in divorce, there’s a need for this expo, the pair tell TODAY’s Amy Robach in a segment that aired Friday.

“Divorce is still in the closet,” said Baras. “We think we talk about it, but when you’re facing it yourself, you are facing it alone.”

Cities throughout Europe have been putting on such expos for years, and Baras and Feuer were actually inspired to bring the event to the U.S. after heading to one in Paris. “[We] fell in love with the idea,” Baras said.

The mother-daughter team brings relevant experience to the table. Baras is married and a family therapist. Feuer, a recent divorcée and single mom, is a divorce mediator. Calling her own divorce “isolating,” she set out to put everything into the expo that she wished she’d had when she was going through her divorce.

1. More about relationships
   1. 30-second therapist: How do I forgive a cheater?
   2. First divorce expo in U.S. aims to ‘empower’ attendees
   3. Planning a wedding before the proposal? Let Pinterest help
   4. 30-second therapist: Why won’t he say ‘I love you’?
   5. Oh, how times have changed over 50 years of marriage

The event, which costs $75 for a one-day ticket and $125 for both days, includes over 100 professionals that deal with divorce, with vendors hawking everything that one would expect, like counseling, legal services and financial expertise (TODAY money expert Jean Chatzky is a keynote speaker at the event). More surprising exhibitors include a business that arranges ceremonies providing reconciliation for couples embroiled in divorce proceedings, plastic surgery professionals, a matchmaker and beauty experts.

“Besides having all this information that’s very important to demystify divorce,” Baras said, “we have the other side…how to put your makeup on again; how to feel sexual, how to start dating.”

Randi Lambert, a mother of two, is ending a 14-year marriage and says she plans to attend the expo.

“I want to make sure I know anything and everything,” she said. “(So) I won’t have to look back and say I should’ve, I could’ve.”

Baras and Feuer say they’re not proponents of divorce; instead, they are in the business of supporting the people going through the process. Feuer calls the expo “empowering and uplifting,” and says that people shouldn’t look at divorce as something negative, but as a necessary transition in people’s lives when the dream of happily ever after doesn’t quite last for forever.